Directed from the Lakewood Observer:

Join the Becke Center Youth Theatre for their run of Into the Woods starting this Friday, February 25 through March 6 on the Mackey Main Stage. Show times are 7:30 p.m. Fridays, and 3 p.m. Saturdays and Sundays with a 10 a.m. student matinee on Thursday, March 3.

Support arts education, be thoroughly entertained… and bring the whole family! But the show does explore some darker themes, so if you do, here are some ideas to get a discussion going about them. Feel free to visit my blog (below) to share what you came up with!

Before the Show:

• Of the fairy tales you already know, what do they have in common?
• What do you think happens to fairytale characters after “Happily Ever After”? (Be ready to see lots of possibilities at the show…)
• There is a song in the show called “Children Will Listen.” What do you think it will be about, based on what you know about the show?

After the Show:

• Rapunzel and her mother, the witch, sing about their relationship as mother and daughter “Our Little World”—a song that is often left out of the show. Aside from taking an opportunity to showcase Leah Windahl and Carleigh Spence’s lovely harmonies, why do you think the director chose to keep it in?
• In Act II, Cinderella sings “Mother cannot guide you, now you’re on your own. Only me beside you. No one is alone. Truly. No one is alone.” Where else do you see this idea that “no one is alone” in the play?
• Even though there are witches and princesses, there really are no “good guys” and “bad guys” in this musical. Like the witch says “I was just trying to be a good parent.” Try your hand at writing your own story where “good guys” make mistakes and “bad guys” are people just like everyone else. Feel free to share! You can post your stories on my blog at: blogs.bgsu.edu/lfraley

Directed from the Lakewood Observer:

Artistic Director, Scott Spence, announced that Jerry Springer the Opera is, “Exactly what it sounds like.” If by that he meant offensive and sacrilegious, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that opening night was peppered with the best press the Beck Center could ever hope for— dozens of individuals and signs protesting the blasphemy of Biblical themes and characters in the show’s second act. With protestors strewn about Detroit Ave and the director’s disconcerting disclaimer in my head, I walked into the theatre on opening night with expectations of complete absurdity and lewdness. To my delight, just like the talk show it’s based on, Jerry Springer the Opera is not only absurd and lewd, but absolutely brilliant.

Though morally questionable, Jerry Springer is a genius. He panders the lowest of the low’s dysfunctions and makes a fortune doing it. And what better medium to represent this tabloid television than opera—a medium that so often thrives on unreal and unnecessary drama and heightened emotion! Scott Spence and set designer Trad A. Burns use extremely clever conventions that enhance this. TVs above the stage replicate what America is so used to seeing on talk shows, with the surreal effect of letting us also see the live human beings (and all their cheating, swearing, screaming mayhem) a mere ten feet away at times. What’s more, the audience is in thrust— 3-sided seating— but the third side is filled with a ridiculous motley crew of characters created by an extremely talented ensemble.  This set up makes it almost impossible to stop from joining in with the annoying but contagious chant of “Jer-ry! Jer-ry!” especially while Matthew Wright gives a spot-on portrayal of Jerry Springer’s apathy and effortless politician’s swagger.

Despite the brilliance of the first act, the second is a bit of sensory overload. It’s also the act that is the primary source of the Judeo-Christian controversy, containing Adam and Eve, God, Satan, Jesus and Mary— “The teen mother of Jesus who was raped by God.” (Get what they mean by “irreverent” now?) Though the commentary becomes convoluted at this point, the performances remain strong and Martín Céspedes’ imaginative largely gesture-based choreography and simple formations continue to be particularly impressive in the limited space of the small studio theatre.

Gilgamesh Taggett gives another great performance at the Beck, sufficient in the first act, but the driving force of the second as a completely charismatic Prince of Darkness. Other especially noteworthy performances include the soprano stylings of Ryan Bergeron as an uproarious transgender Springer guest (moving miraculously well in platform heels) and Diana Farrell playing 3 roles—all unique from one another, but equally engaging and all performed with her powerful and gripping vocal technique.

The Beck Center presents the award-winning musical, Jerry Springer: The Opera, in the Studio Theater, February 18 through March 27, 2011. Showtimes are 8 p.m. Fridays and Saturdays and 7 p.m. Sundays. There are no matinee performances for this production.

This production is not recommended for children and contains material that may offend some people.

So is the controversy worth it? Does the commentary come through? See the show and share your thoughts!

You were probably directed here from The Lakewood Observer where I submit theater reviews for the productions done at The Beck Center in Lakewood. This blog is a bit of an experiment for any Lakewoodites who want to have the post-show conversation that is all-too-often left out of the theatre-going experience.

I ended my last Lakewood Observer submission by asking if the fun and fluff goals of Joseph… were goals worth accomplishing. Despite my somewhat critical review of this production, I absolutely believe the answer to be yes. Fun and fluff are the basis of so much American entertainment- from tongue-in-cheek satire of Kander & Ebb to the glitter of the entire golden age of musicals that was especially known to boost the morale of a post-World War II society.

As a 20-something myself, I so appreciate the energy, playfulness and plain fun of the work from the early career of Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd Webber who wrote Joseph… fresh out of college. But being a 20-something means more than just this. Stereotypically a liberal environment, the college experience is about questioning norms and challenging the status quo. Joseph… and its Bible-based predecessor Jesus Christ Superstar, were written during 2nd wave feminism. No doubt, this was a contributing factor in leveling out the gender representation in casting in 1982 when the show reached Broadway with a female narrator. The Beck Center’s production, however, is one where the men are given opportunity to play, tumble, emote, fight, discover and do real comedy. And why shouldn’t they? It’s a show about Joseph and his brothers, based on the very patriarchal Old Testament for that matter! But each woman (other than the narrator) is reduced to nameless set of legs that does high kicks or at the very most used her sex appeal to illicitly seduce the protagonist.  

Am I suggesting that Joseph… suddenly become a political show? No. That would be absurd and probably painfully contrived. But what do you think? What is a director’s responsibility when in charge of a show that either does not give voice to women or other minorities?

I’m in love!  The object of my affection is Shabby Apple! Feminist-friendly (and just so damn cute!), this online-store is slowly becoming my new addiction… as long as my wallet allows it.

First off, their entire fashion is based on the “every woman is beautiful”– and despite being the generation of Seventeen magazine and headlines to “reduce your flaws”, I believe them this time. There is your typical “style” quiz you could find in any fashion mag on the shelves (I got a fairly accurate, though generic result of “bohemian”). But the body-type quiz has a line of questioning and a set of results that truly does embrace short legs, wide hips and flat chests in an honest way that doesn’t attempt to conceal “flaws” but instead, emphasizes variety in beauty and encourages the development of personal taste above all. The variety in shape and style here is enough for most women I know (at least of the ones who wear skirts), even the most critical and quirky of them.

I was a bit off-put by the separate section for plus-sizes, but I do appreciate the choice to size them WS/WM/WL rather than XXXXXXXXL…  As someone who teeters on either side of size M, depending which body part is deciding, I can only imagine how irritated I would be, getting called “extra” anything. (Oh yeah! That convinces me that this dress will make me feel sexy! I love getting adendums tacked onto my size to say “abnormal!”)

One of the coolest and most unique features about Shabby Apple, though, is their partnership with a non-profit called Unitus. Shabby Apple donates the obligator 5% of sales to the non-profit as most companies preoccupied with image are wont to do, but more significant is their committment to sharing the stories of the working women who are a part of their programming with microfinance orgnizations in India. AND upon further research, I’ve found that these loans are not conditional hand-outs like the ones in the Mahon article I reference in an earlier blog entry. The money they loan to these women is accompanied by the freedom to be true entrepreneurs.

I got a 60% off Groupon  so I’ll be able to afford a dress this time (though probably not next time…) but even on a budget, the site is great eye candy, so go explore!

 ALSO, be sure to check out their blog! Great stuff here.

After being so negative about unclear satire, I thought I would include an example of something that is very clearly a joke, the cover of a 2008 New Yorker shortly before the presidential  election.

For one– this over-the-top image depicts both the president and first lady in perfect cartoon shape, with oversized heads and all. If the cartoonish style of disproportionate feet doesn’t give it away, look at the burning flag, the framed photo above the fireplace and Michelle Obama’s rifle and camoflage pants. What this image says is that anyone who does see Michelle Obama as an untamed beast so has a clearly warped perception, just like this cartoon. Of course, the race and gender connection is very clear, and speaks volumes to the fact that the public’s perception IS because of she is assertive, confident and well, let’s just say it… black. A lampoon of an assertive white woman (Hillary Clinton, for example) would most likely be depicted in a less animalistic fashion.

And most importantly, the New Yorker recognized that these images could have potential for controversy, and that a funny (and short-lived) joke has its place in ONLY in the eye-catching cover. If you turn the page and just take a glance at the content of the article, it is about Obama’s dealing with a sexual assault case early in his career, being raised by a single mother and more. Clearly this could said anyone straight who somehow thought that the New Yorker’s message was that the president is a flag-burning Muslim extremist.

Under all of this however, is the underlying message the humor of incongruity. Obamas aside, our governement would never have a Muslim president. It would never have a first lady with military experience. To depict such a thing is uproarious! Although it does protect the Obamas, it also protects the categories of what is normative and what is cartoonishly unrealistic.

I have been endlessly entertained, and simultaneously offended by someecards.com: the classic example of shock value marketing.

With simple vintage-style contour drawings and catchy, edgy one-liners, and their tagline “When you care enough to hit send”, it’s pretty clear that they are poking fun at the immediate-gratification aspect of our society. However, like most satire, it runs the risk of being misunderstood, especially when it tackles some pretty sensitive stuff regarding a variety of topics… but the love section is the most fascinating from a feminist lense. http://www.someecards.com/flirting-cards/most-sent-today

Take a look below to see what I mean.

“I’d appreciate if you start treating me like a sex object”
“I respect that you’re a bit slutty”
“I blame your breasts for my inability to focus during our conversations”
“If I was your coworker, I would sexually harrass you”

These are some of the lines written on the eCards. It’s pretty obvious that at least 2 of those are written to be given to women, whether from a man or from another woman. At face value, these are mind bogglingly twisted … bordering on creepy, mostly because there ARE people out there who WOULD say this stuff in ernest!

Some of these love cards are nontraditional in a postive and mutually non-objectifying way. Some examples are the adorable, “I’d love to awkwardly sway with you at an outdoor concert” or the very witty, “If I someday finish the oppressively comprehensive eHarmony questionnaire, I hope it pairs me with someone like you” Plus, there are some just simply defiant “I don’t let my porn define me”… which could be a fun companion to an inside joke, or just a blatant independence.

In other words, if this site isn’t marked “Handle With Care”, my hope is just that people using it have enough education or just plain common sense to recognize what is genuinely degrading and what is satire.

I am proud to present to you todaaaaay…….

A dinner in two acts!

Act I

Lauren: I’ll have the cheeseburger.
Andrew: I’ll have the shrimp alfredo.
Server: OK, I’ll have those right out for you in a bit.

INTERMISSION

Waiter: OK, we’ve got the cheeseburger for you, sir….
Andrew: Oh, that’s actually hers.
Server: Oh, I uh. Ha! Um Sorry.
           Server throws down the second plate and scurries offstage hanging his head in shame.

 Fin.

Quality drama, no? 

Yeah, this is an oversimplification of a true experience my boyfriend and I had and it may seem like a complete overreaction. But it’s a good lead in to all sorts of gender analysis of FOOD!– something I never really saw as gendered in the past… and it’s much more than just meat=mocho, pasta=delicate.

Food is complex. Where and how you get your food is even more gendered than just what’s on the plate. As a perfect icon of the yuppie era, Band Aid’s annoyingly 80s-tastic (supposedly) feel-good Christmas ballad “FEED THE WORLD!” aka “Do they know it’s Christmas time?” illustrates this exactly. (Here it is if you are feeling masochistic enough to watch it…  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT9lKyi0dDM )  If the ethnocentric titles of the song aren’t enough to rub you the wrong way, here’s another way to look at this…

Martha McMahon has an interesting insight in her article “Resisting Globalization”… she says “more and more, agriculture is framed as a masculinist (and white) moral project of ‘feeding the world”– a moral project that is ideologically in the service of international trade.” Social inequality is all over the place when it comes to agriculture. Contrary to what we Westerners typically perceive farmers to be, the vast majority of local urban farmers are female, and even those Western organic farmers who are male are typically “feminized” as well.

These are the local farms that have the capability to improve community health and regenerate local economy. Yet, they are also those that are typically squelched by “FEED THE WORLD” type of projects… which brings to mind visions we see too often… the insensitivity of dropping off large quantities of food that are culturally inappropriate under the guise of “charity”… which is minor compared to the economic impact that this  “charity” can have especially when paired with cultural expectations (ie. loans that require the discontinuation of social welfare, subsidization of education,  etc.) 

Oooooh and the avenues to explore with all sorts of gender issues regarding the song’s use of Christmas (from the patriarchal religion of Christianity) as a manipulation tool… but perhaps that’s another blog for another day…

I enjoy guilty pleasure television as much as the next person, but I find myself saying the phrase “DO PEOPLE REALLY SAY THAT STUFF??” far too often for the experience to be enjoyable.

I should probably clarify.

Desperate Housewives is known for being over the top. From suburban murder mystery to “accidental” poisoning at a dinner parties, (all done with the whimsical but ominous tone of Wysteria Lane), the circumstances do not aim for understatement. However, its identifiable characters and easily recognizable setting make this line of realism very blurred. This becomes important when the TV show morphs from a model OF culture into a model FOR culture, acting as a reference for viewers to imitate. Gender is one major way.

Take last week’s episode. (The only one I have watched in months…but a prime example nonetheless) EXHIBIT A: The hookup between Katherine, a formerly married woman and Robin, a female (self-identified lesbian) stripper. EXHIBIT B: Katherine’s subsequent feelings of identity confusion and guilt. EXHIBIT C: Katherine’s Ex-husband’s feelings of identity confusion and emasculation.

Whew. If that condensed version is so jam-packed with indicators about gender and its intersectionality with sexual orientation, imagine what the full episode, not to mention the whole series has…

Alright. So the ex-husband doubted that his masculinity fulfilled his wife– that it’s his “fault” that she experimented with another woman (as if a same-sex relationship is something warrant “blame”). His current wife began to explain to him that it wasn’t that at all! That he’s very in touch with his feminine side, having cried at The Notebook when they watched it together. He immediately got defensive, saying “Yeah, tears of BOREDOM!”   He is seeing his situation as a double-bind which is actually not. His perceived catch-22 is that masculinity is obviously not enough for his ex-wife, but his femininity or sensitivity is what caused him to lose her. In reality though, and according to Katherine’s statement during dating, this is soooo not even about him as an individual. Essentially, his defensiveness stems from his need to fit a gender mold, not his ex-wife’s sexual identity.

Not because of her ex-husband, but because of the dating scene, Katherine also feels that she needs to “give up on men”. At first, her need to give up on dating indicates that somehow she can’t live up to men’s standards, but later starts becoming attracted to women. This episode seems to also indicate that these gender expectations somehow lead to changes in (or the CHOICE to change) sexual preference, at least in Katherine’s case. When women viewers see this, it may liberate them to MAKE these choices. However, for male viewers, with the defensive hypermasculine ex-husband as a model there isn’t much depth.

For me, this is just as bad as creating one-dimensional female characters of the 1950’s who lack the agency of male counterparts. For me, Feminism is about choice and equality– not dominance and pigeon-holing men.

This scene shows how it all started: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sgmie274aAA

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/7323888/Debenhams-first-with-disabled-High-Street-model.html

 “Debenhams first with disabled High Street model”

The high-end British retailer Debenhams has included disabled models in photoshoots. [sarcastic and overdramatic] GASP!!!  

OK I’m sorry, but this apparently “bold move” seemed like a complete no-brainer to me! Why would disabled models NOT be included?? Then I realized two things. Realization #1- I am from a different world. I’m grateful for this, but that fact is that I just don’t know the world of high fasion. Their world has different taboos, so of COURSE this is considered a big deal in the world of high fashion! And then Realization #2- Oh my god. I am so naive. Their world is really not all that different from the mainstream. High-end, low-end… middle-end fashion…I rarely even see disabled models in Walmart ads! And undoubtedly, the concept of gender is deeply entwined in this observation about disability.

The most obvious thing that this article indicates is what our standard of beauty is for women- a single standard that does not embrace diversity of any kind. High end fashion sets a precedent for the standard of beauty of other fashion industries, and therefore our daily lives- (dis)ability is just one aspect. Since there isn’t as much of a market for male models in high fashion anyway, the standard for men is not as clear in this industry. Although of course the fact that it IS female dominated on the runway (and male dominated in terms of design) says something in and of itself too– women are the main consumers in contemporary US society, their physical beauty is glorified, they are not the ones making the decisions of what those standards ARE… the list goes on.

An analysis of this article can also be taken all sorts of other cynical places, including a hunch that this was a PR move in order to gain altruistic sympathy and press attention… but Debenhams seems to cover its bases for nay-sayers. It is very clear that Debenhams is NOT just choosing an arbitrary heart string to pull. They truly believe in the beauty of VARIETY, and do so by also displaying size 16 mannequins in their store windows and actually building prosthetic legs for models on the runway as well as the garments they use. So I give Kudos to Debenhams and their female and male campaigners and designers! They clearly believe in diversity and equality– and do something ABOUT IT!

I can distinctly remember a massive bucket of legos that sat in my basement family room growing up. These gender-neutral brightly colored bricks of bliss were the highlight of many a play date with my cousins Holly, Zach and Jordan. 12 years later during this past Christmas, I bought my boyfriend an Annakin Skywalker lego keychain at the massive Lego store in the Mall of America in Minneapolis. I was dumbfounded by the extent to which I found Legos to be gendered. I left the mall wondering if my former assessment of these beautiful building blocks was a result of a sheltered childhood or completely warped marketing 12 years later.

I investigated Lego’s website. TWENTY NINE products are found on their homepage. Oh, what’s that you say, 10-year old reader? These must be gender neutral? Why, what an interesting prospect! Let’s find out!

Spongebob, Star Wars, Toy Story! Oh, perfect! As a 10 year old girl, you’ll be super excited to see the strong senator and former queen, Padme from Star Wars and the spunky, independent cowgirl Jessie from Toy Story! Oh, dear me. What’s this? Oh. It seems Jessie’s been reduced to “the best little friend a girl could want” and Padme has been left out completely. Sorry ‘ bout that.

But have no fear! You can discover the vast multitude of SIX lego products are found on the “Girls’ Page”, which is filled with puppies, princesses and pink. Surely that should entertain you far more than the racing and robot designing on TWENTY NINE other product pages that hone problem solving skills and train young minds to work in high paying fields like architecture, computer engineering and design! That’s why we only have boys playing with the toys in our pictures, silly! You surely have no competitive edge or risk-taking ability so feel free to ignore these as you enjoy your… pink.

Oh, what’s that? Six is not enough games for you? Well, then come to the LEGO Chic Boutique when you can find out if  “you have the skills to run the coolest fashion chain on the planet!” This way you can make sure you please your customers with your savvy knowledge of the fashion industry and how you look! *Wink!*

…OK.

 Rant over. And I’ll give them this: at least this fashion chic boutique is about entrepreneurial skills. The girls play the role of manager and owner, not just stylist. They are given agency to explore to an extent within this gender role, even if it is a gender role that is preoccupied with image. And I’ve gotta say it is so completely a two-way street. The rugged image for boys can at times be equally narrow when it comes to Indiana Jones, massive and muscular Bionacle men and the lack of male representation on the page for only girls to nurture by caring for these puppies.

Now I just sit back and wonder what was really going on in 1998 beyond my basement walls as I sat oblivious to the fact that I was in fact playing with a “boy’s toy”.

(The pictures are acting up, so two of these products can be found in my flikr account.

See the girl page where “romantic boat tours” and babies are the main focus: http://www.flickr.com/photos/47018161@N06/4395953992/in/photostream/

and conversely, one of the 29 pages each with multiple products. This one includes rescue trucks, and saving people from burning buildings: http://www.flickr.com/photos/47018161@N06/4395186825/in/photostream/ )